"The Helios 44-2 is a very popular Soviet-era lens among cinematographers" - yeah, not like there were any other Soviet lens available there. Legendary in this context means the only ones anyone there could get their hands on. I bought Zenit ET with those and can't say they were amazing compared to my Nikon or Sigma lens. Exotic factor is likely in the play here.

▲

jogu 4 hours ago | parent [-]

If it was just a simple matter of "what was available" these lenses would be an interesting footnote in Photography history. But that's not the case, people still buy them for their unique properties 50 years later and the fact a company exists to re-house them more than proves their legendary status in my mind.

▲

hkpack 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There is a phenomenon I observe with people being fascinated by russian/soviet things even when in reality the subject of interest is pure shit.

Being it either a low quality lenses in which people see a artistic quality of manufacturing defects or text from Dostoevsky which ruminates in extended length the inner thought process of a moronic character which some mistake for a mysterious russian soul.

I own Helios lenses with Zenit camera I inherited from my father which is of the sentimental value as it was a first significant purchase after my parents wedding, and most of my childhood photos are done with it, but even my dad will trade it for a good Nikon lenses without a second thought.

	▲	FpUser an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I myself dislike Dostoevsky and all this "old Soviet lenses" obsession reminds me of audiophile's craziness. I however can assure you that "shit" is not the only things USSR has produced. Far from it.

▲

storus 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The swirly effect is certainly unique, though I always considered it a bug as it's not even, some parts look oversharpened, some diffused. Like some weird algorithmic filter in Photoshop.